To Seek Bad Faith Tort Damages There Must be Injury in Excess of Policy Benefits
Post 5205
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/payment-appraisal-award-precludes-bad-faith-claim-zalma-esq-cfe-rkzrc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5200 posts.
In Keith Frederich v. Trisura Specialty Insurance Company, No. 24-40748, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (October 7, 2025) explained that an insured cannot maintain tort claims against an insurer if the insured has received the full appraisal award, absent evidence of an independent injury.
FACTS
Keith Frederich sued his insurer, Trisura Specialty Insurance Company ("Trisura" ), for allegedly violating the Texas Insurance Code. He appealed the grant of summary judgment in favor of Trisura.
Trisura moved for summary judgment, arguing that its payment of the appraisal award plus interest foreclosed Frederich's claims. Frederich countered that Chapter 541 allows an insured to recover tort damages that are cumulative to, and distinct from, any breach-of-contract damages. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Trisura, concluding that Frederich had received all benefits to which he was entitled through the appraisal process and had failed to establish an independent injury.
ANALYSIS
On appeal, Frederich contended that Chapter 541 allows an insured to recover tort damages that are independent and distinct from contractual damages for breach of contract.
Trisura argued that its payment of the appraisal award plus statutory interest foreclosed all of Frederich's claims under Chapter 541. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that an insured cannot bring tort claims against an insurer under Chapter 541 after receiving an appraisal award and applicable statutory interest, absent an independent injury.
The Fifth Circuit explained that an insured cannot maintain tort claims against an insurer if the insured has received the full appraisal award, absent evidence of an independent injury.
Frederich's argument failed under the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Mirelez v. State Farm Lloyds, 127 F.4th 949 (5th Cir. 2025). Like Frederich, Mirelez asserted he could recover tort damages even when an appraisal award, any applicable interest, and any payments due under the insurance policy were paid out.
Because Mirelez sought no actual damages other than the policy benefits paid in accordance with the policy's appraisal provision, he could not maintain a bad faith claim under either the common law or chapter 541.
Mirelez foreclosed the insured's appeal because even if the plaintiff in Mirelez had raised the same statutory-construction argument, the panel would have rejected it as foreclosed by the Texas Supreme Court's interpretation of Chapter 541.
In sum, Mirelez foreclosed Frederich's appeal. Absent an independent injury, an insured cannot bring tort claims against an insurer under Chapter 541 after receiving an appraisal award and applicable statutory interest.
ZALMA OPINION
Bad faith suits in Texas require, among other things, damages other than a common law breach of contract. When, as here, Frederich's claims were paid in full after appraisal. As a result he incurred no damages in excess of the claim amount which was paid in full plus interest.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the InsuranceClaims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.
Arsonist Tried To Represent Himself, Failed, and Sought Habeas Relief
Post number 5357
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/he-who-acts-his-own-lawyer-has-idiot-client-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-d4bwc, See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Karacson’s Arson for Profit Attempt Required Skill & Experience to Succeed
In Steve Ellis Karacson v. David Shaver, Warden, No. 25-1089, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit (May 20, 2026) Steve Karacson was convicted in Michigan state court of arson and insurance fraud after evidence showed he burned his own insured home. Investigators found multiple points of origin, gasoline odor, and evidence tying him to the scene, including cell-phone location data and a receipt showing he had purchased a gas can and gloves shortly before the fire.
FACTS
Karacson initially had appointed counsel, but his relationships with both appointed attorneys ...
Foolish to Repeatedly Disobey Court Orders
All That Remains For Trial Is Plaintiff’s Damages On Each Of These Claims And Establishing Proximate Causation Of Those Damages.
Post number 5348
See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus 5300 posts.
In Linh Wang v. Esurance Insurance Company, No. C24-0447-JCC, United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle (May 1, 2026) John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge, found that throughout this case, culminating with its briefing on Plaintiff’s renewed motion and that Defendant has subjected Plaintiff to unnecessary motion practice for clearly discoverable information and made dubious representations (including to the Court).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case involves an underinsured/uninsured motorist insurance bad faith claim arising from a 2017 motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff, Linh Wang, alleges that Esurance Insurance ...
The Right to Negotiate with Insurer is Not an Assignment of Claims
Post number 5347
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ambiguous-contract-repair-assignment-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2xppc, see the full video at https://rumble.com/v79is1s-ambiguous-contract-to-repair-not-an-assignment.html and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Nebraska Requires an Actual Assignment to Allow Contractor to Sue Insurer
In Millard Gutter Company, a corporation doing business as Millard Roofing and Gutter v. Farmers Mutual Insurance Company of Nebraska, also known as Farmers Mutual Insurance, also known as Farmers Mutual, No. A-24-818, Court of Appeals of Nebraska (May 5, 2026) Millard sued Farmers as an assignee of Jane Anzalone who had hired Millard Gutter to repair the roof of her home and agreed to allow Millard Gutter to coordinate with her insurer, Farmers Mutual, concerning reimbursement for repairs authorized under her insurance policy.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In ...
It is a Crime to Lie to Your Insurer That Accident Happened After Policy Inception
Post number 5386
Posted on July 3, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Conviction for Fraud Affirmed Because Evidence Overwhelming
In State Of Washington v. Saleem Mumin Robinson, No. 87244-3-I, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1 (June 29, 2026) Saleem Robinson was involved in an automobile collision on May 18, 2021. The other driver, Mohamed Waggeh, photographed Robinson’s documents and later reported the collision to GEICO, identifying the time as approximately 12:40 p.m.
That same day, at 6:06 p.m., more than five hours after the accident, Robinson purchased Progressive insurance for the vehicle involved in the collision.
The next morning, Robinson called Progressive to report the claim and stated that the accident occurred around 6:15 p.m. Progressive recorded that call without advising Robinson that it was being recorded. Progressive later conducted a special investigative unit investigation the claim because it was submitted shortly ...
Deprive Insurer of the Ability to Properly and Timely Investigate Claim & Recover Nothing
Posted on July 2, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5385
No Contract Claim No Bad Faith Claim
In South Alexander Development I, LLC v.Markel American Insurance Co., Civil Action No. 23-1436-JWD-SDJ, United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana (June 24, 2026) South Alexander Development I, LLC (SADI) owned and operated a solar farm in Springfield, Louisiana that allegedly sustained significant Hurricane Ida damage.
After SADI submitted a claim, MAIC ultimately paid $1,099,614.02 for undisputed physical damage plus the $210,000 income-loss policy limit. SADI later sued for breach of contract and statutory bad faith, contending MAIC failed to fully investigate and adjust the claim; MAIC sought summary judgment, arguing SADI failed to cooperate and withheld material repair-cost information.
LAW:
Louisiana insurance policies are interpreted as contracts according to their plain meaning, and the insured bears the burden ...
Deprive Insurer of the Ability to Properly and Timely Investigate Claim & Recover Nothing
Posted on July 2, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5385
No Contract Claim No Bad Faith Claim
In South Alexander Development I, LLC v.Markel American Insurance Co., Civil Action No. 23-1436-JWD-SDJ, United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana (June 24, 2026) South Alexander Development I, LLC (SADI) owned and operated a solar farm in Springfield, Louisiana that allegedly sustained significant Hurricane Ida damage.
After SADI submitted a claim, MAIC ultimately paid $1,099,614.02 for undisputed physical damage plus the $210,000 income-loss policy limit. SADI later sued for breach of contract and statutory bad faith, contending MAIC failed to fully investigate and adjust the claim; MAIC sought summary judgment, arguing SADI failed to cooperate and withheld material repair-cost information.
LAW:
Louisiana insurance policies are interpreted as contracts according to their plain meaning, and the insured bears the burden ...
